Headlines

Bill Bennett

Republicans lost the culture war

Rather than offer a broad sweeping vision for the country, Democrats played identity politics. Republicans were the culprits, and women, young adults, black, Latinos, etc… were the victims. And voters believed it. Why? For the same reason this litany — gender, race, ethnicity, class — sound so familiar.

Voters believed it, not because it was something new or groundbreaking, but because this has been the template of many of our character-building institutions — our public schools, our colleges, and public universities — for the past 50 years. Go to any major university in America and this is the mindset that is taught, preached, and ingested. It also gets an assist from television drama, from the movies, and from much of the mainstream media.

For decades liberals have succeeded in defining the national discourse, the terms of discussion, and, therefore, the election, in these terms. They have successfully set the parameters and focus of the national and political dialogue as predominantly about gender, race, ethnicity, and class. This is the paradigm, the template through which many Americans, probably a majority, more or less view the world, our country, and the election. It is a divisive strategy and Democrats have targeted and exploited those divides.

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Well, we probably lost it at about the time the president cheated on his wife, committed perjury when asked about it, and was allowed to remain in office. But we’ve been able to paper it over until now.

I would think Tea Party folks would not object to running socially liberal and fiscally conservative candidates in the purple states, though. True believers in the Tea Party – and not just tagalong so-cons – consider social issues to be a secondary concern.

Rather than offer a broad sweeping vision for the country, Democrats played identity politics. Republicans were the culprits, and women, young adults, black, Latinos, etc… were the victims. And voters believed it. Why? For the same reason this litany — gender, race, ethnicity, class — sound so familiar.

Pretty hard to win a war when A—there are not that many willing to engage on the subject, and B—those that do often come across as goofy.

You can’t have “lost the culture war”. You can only “be losing the culture war”.
Because the whole point for the left is to have something to attack and tare down. Once they “win” one argument, they will move on to the next target to desecrate.

Minorities voted for free stuff. Women were easily manipulated by their emotions and ladyparts. When it all comes crashing down, reason will return, the same way that mean old brute of a man is so welcome when the the barbarians are at the gate.

Bill, put your money where your mouth is. Why not get a few of your rich Republican friends together and takeover a newspaper or TV company? Conservatives own talk radio, so I don’t see why they couldn’t own TV and the movies.

There is no reason that programs based on Conservative principles can’t be successful. Build it and they will watch.

The article’s headline is slightly misleading given that it ends like this:

We must counter the discourse and speak and educate in terms of family, faith, freedom, principle, values, work, country, community, improvement, growth, and equality of opportunity. No longer can the Republican Party be solely the party of business. Who controls the terms of discussion, dialogue, and education controls the country and, therefore, the election.

It’s time for Republicans to take it back. This will require much work and time, but there is no more important business.

People say, “when it all comes crashing down”, so easily, as if it will not be devastating to millions of us…let it burn, well, how many of us will be ruined in the process?! My family is responsible, we live way within our means, but if it all comes “crashing down”, we will still be at risk. Ugh, this isn’t even a question, just a rant. Things are so bleak.

That’s why I’ve been advocating moving the Republican party toward more libertarian goals and away from social conservatives. We can at least hold the line there.

Nessuno on November 14, 2012 at 8:50 PM

Disagree. According to the Left, which now has total control over the Dem party, the concept of increased economic liberty and freedom of choice (and all of its inherent benefits) is literally racist. Dem voters, judging by their actions, believe that people that advocate economic liberty are racists and liars. This is what they think. That a majority of citizens believe this indicates that this is an American cultural breakdown.

As for abandoning social issues, that’s a different discussion. I’m just saying that it really seems that most Americans (that vote) have abandoned economic liberty. You can explain the benefits of economic liberty, especially for lower and middle income folks, until you’re blue in the face, they just don’t want it. They want a Euro-style “managed” welfare state. That the Eurozone just plunged into another recession due to unsustainablity issues makes no difference.

I think what’s lost in all of this is that we still have what the left needs: our labor and tax dollars. Suppose we were to all stand together and massively cheat on our taxes, make it as common as jaywalking. This way we don’t even have to rely on elected Republicans to starve the beast. What are they going to incarcerate half the working population?

Disagree. According to the Left, which now has total control over the Dem party, the concept of increased economic liberty and freedom of choice (and all of its inherent benefits) is literally racist

Romney lost voters who made under 50,000 a year. What if, its actually not race baiting, but class consicousness that runs the Left now. This is, of course, the GOP’s worst nightmare. And its precisely why you pursued the southern strategy so effectively for so many years. Heck, southern whites still vote for the GOP in overwhelming numbers. But poor whites out of the south aren’t falling for that dog whistle crap anymore. The Reagan democrat is no more. That’s the realignment. Not black and brown people “voting themselves free stuff.”

Romney lost voters who made under 50,000 a year. What if, its actually not race baiting, but class consicousness that runs the Left now. This is, of course, the GOP’s worst nightmare. And its precisely why you pursued the southern strategy so effectively for so many years. Heck, southern whites still vote for the GOP in overwhelming numbers. But poor whites out of the south aren’t falling for that dog whistle crap anymore. The Reagan democrat is no more. That’s the realignment. Not black and brown people “voting themselves free stuff.”

libfreeordie on November 14, 2012 at 9:27 PM

You yourself have argued on Hotair that economic liberty is racist. Something along the lines of “we’re not buying it….”

That being said, apart from the southern strategy claptrap, we agree: a cultural shift has occurred, and people want a Euro-style “managed decline” welfare state.

Rather than offer a broad sweeping vision for the country, Democrats played identity politics.

Can we finally get rid of this ridiculous canard? Take a look at these two charts and tell me who is offering a vision for the country — the whole country, as it exists right now — and who is offering vision for the country as it existed 40 years ago. It is Republicans who are playing identity politics, chasing after the ever-shrinking white vote rather than trying to reach out to all of the citizens of this country.

You yourself have argued on Hotair that economic liberty is racist. Something along the lines of “we’re not buying it….”

Economic liberty has taken racist forms. It does not *have* to be racist. But, in the history of the U.S. it has often been used as an argument to rationalize some extremely racist behavior. For example, if your customers would prefer not to stop at an integrated store, than economic liberty demands that you bar black people from the store. And economic liberty will, in the same breath, rationalize a bank choosing to systematically deny black entrepeneurs loans to begin businesses of their own. This was the problem with the “separate but equal” part of Plessy. The equal was never achieved even in public accomodations and there was nothing to compel private capital to stop discriminating against racial others.

Economic liberty has taken racist forms. It does not *have* to be racist. But, in the history of the U.S. it has often been used as an argument to rationalize some extremely racist behavior. For example, if your customers would prefer not to stop at an integrated store, than economic liberty demands that you bar black people from the store. And economic liberty will, in the same breath, rationalize a bank choosing to systematically deny black entrepeneurs loans to begin businesses of their own. This was the problem with the “separate but equal” part of Plessy. The equal was never achieved even in public accomodations and there was nothing to compel private capital to stop discriminating against racial others.

libfreeordie on November 14, 2012 at 9:44 PM

It’s not 1896, and it’s not 1950. It’s 2012. There are laws the prohibit discrimination now. Progressives must view America in a race-locked time warp in order for their ideology to “make sense.”

As for banks “systematically” denying loans, what are you talking about? Banks, like any other business, are trying to make a profit. They will loan to credit-worthy people, regardless of color. If they were “systematically” denying loans then there were perhaps other forces at play. Again, discrimination based solely on race is illegal now. It’s not 1950. The free market is colorblind. This is one of the best things about it. Major League Baseball is a great example. Racist MLB owners hired black athletes back in the day because the market demanded it. They had no choice.

It’s not 1950. The free market is colorblind. This is one of the best things about it. Major League Baseball is a great example. Racist MLB owners hired black athletes back in the day because the market demanded it. They had no choice.

Explain to me, then, why the Democrats lost so many voters this election? In a D+6 turnout, Obama wins by a shade under 2 points. Dems lost a lot of voters but depended on a massive turnout of their hardcore base in the most urban areas to pull out this victory by the skin of their teeth.

Redistricting resulted in the loss of 10 Republican House districts in CA and IL but the Republicans lost only 6 seats. That is not shabby in an election where the President is expected to have some “coattails”. Two Senate losses were stupidity on the part of the people of the state and the candidates themselves. The people for nominating idiots and the candidates for validating their idiocy.

We did a LOT worse in 2006 and 2008. We were in a lot worse shape after Nixon .. for years. We lost an election that was very emotional because of the stakes involved but we didn’t get plastered as we have in the past. We held our own, all things considered.

We are set in much better shape headed into 2014 than we were headed into 2010. One thing I would ask of people: Pay attention to your local elections. These would be the little elections that most people ignore. Democrats don’t ignore those. We need to start chipping away at them from the bottom up. A big unexpected turnout by Republicans can knock Democrats out of local offices even if we are greatly outnumbered. Find your local county or state GOP committee website and find out when these little elections are happening and participate. Actually interact with people local to you. Reach out to families, business owners, heck, everyone. We need to get this thing turned around and it starts in the local elections.

We’ve been in much worse shape than we are now. Don’t believe the “all is lost” hype. We have more state governments than we have had in decades. We just have to chip away. The Democrats lost a lot more votes this election than the Republicans did. Does that mean it is THEY who are losing the culture war?

Actually, I think the lesson of this election isn’t that the culture war is lost, so much as that it has to be fought on the ground, rather then at the ballot box.

The Pro-Life crowd for example, did itself a world of good when it ran commercials talking about when unborn children developed heart beats, pulses, finger prints, etc. The more the issue was approached in these terms, the more broadly accepted the pro-life position became.

This year, we saw a lot of older white men yelling about moral rectitude when discussing abortion, and support for the pro life position has fallen to 35%.

PS: Honestly, I’d rather see socially conservative groups investing in the culture, rather than financing elections. Santorum got, what, over a hundred million dollars for the Primary? If you took the money that was channeled to Santorum, Akin, and Mourdoc, you’d probably have enough money to buy your own modest sized Hollywood movie studio.

I mean seriously, I’d much rather see more films like Juno. Much better investment than sending money towards old badgers like Akin.

PS: Honestly, I’d rather see socially conservative groups investing in the culture, rather than financing elections. Santorum got, what, over a hundred million dollars for the Primary? If you took the money that was channeled to Santorum, Akin, and Mourdoc, you’d probably have enough money to buy your own modest sized Hollywood movie studio.

I mean seriously, I’d much rather see more films like Juno. Much better investment than sending money towards old badgers like Akin.

WolvenOne on November 15, 2012 at 1:19 AM

I could not agree more. All that money uselessly pounded down a rathole so some total longshot candidates could indulge their fantasies.

Years ago, I heard that the producer of the Lion, Witch & Wardrobe movies was going to produce conservative films. I don’t know what happened with him. A few CS Lewis movies and that was it.

There have been a few weak, overly earnest and dopey conservatives movies that have made it to TV.

What is needed is funding for a conservative movie studio that knows how to be relevant and hit the libs where it hurts with questions and issues that make libs uncomfortable. That could be very entertaining and have an impact on the culture as well.

People say, “when it all comes crashing down”, so easily, as if it will not be devastating to millions of us…let it burn, well, how many of us will be ruined in the process?! My family is responsible, we live way within our means, but if it all comes “crashing down”, we will still be at risk. Ugh, this isn’t even a question, just a rant. Things are so bleak.

ellifint on November 14, 2012 at 9:04 PM

The way I see it, we’re all going to be ruined anyway. I’m like you, living within our means, etc. But it seems to me that it will all come crashing down, no matter what. Which is why it’s good you and I are prepared as we can be.

One of the several things I thought of as advantages of the Romney loss is it won’t all get blamed on him. (Another is that it will probably be better for Ann Romney’s health.)

That’s why I’ve been advocating moving the Republican party toward more libertarian goals and away from social conservatives. We can at least hold the line there.

Nessuno on November 14, 2012 at 8:50 PM

Agreed.

There’s absolutely nothing wrong with candidates holding certain moral stances, but we’re well past the time when socially conservative policy will ever be enacted in the federal government.

KingGold on November 14, 2012 at 8:54 PM

Agreed, agreed, and “hell yes” agreed.

This is not a conservative nation anymore folks, and we’re only kidding ourselves with that line. Rampant abortion, pervert ‘marriage’, and the looming threat of drug legalization are just SOME of what we’re facing.

My only quibble is that we MIGHT still be able to hold the line on marriage at the state level. But yeah, at a federal level, we can forget it.